Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Aug 4, 2010 Full story: www.cnn.com 201,397

A federal judge in California has knocked down the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, ruling Wednesday that the state's controversial Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution.

Full Story
Mike the Pike

Glenn, CA

#190192 Apr 26, 2013
Consent will not be a problem. I have yet to hear a dog say the word "NO"!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#190193 Apr 26, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to be centering your argument on the basis that they don't, and that is why same-sex marriage is a non-issue. Are you no longer interested in that line of reasoning?
<quoted text>
You hardly ever have a point, you simply post talking points over and over again. Most times they don't even relate to the post you are replying to.
<quoted text>
Marriage is a social construct created by homo-sapiens.
<quoted text>
It doesn't matter if I agree or not. The historical basis for marriage, as the government regulates it in this country, was to protect and ensure stability for the children that could potentially be created from such a union. This is the entire reason the court has accepted that there is a State interest in marriage. If this is no longer the case, than what interest does the State have?
The State interest has always been in regards to "potential." You would know this if you would actually educate yourself rather than running around thinking any of your opinions have any basis if fact.
What is completely illogical, is a group of people not only inviting, but demanding the government regulate them.
Hmmmmm....ya know Ak.....that last line speaks volumes. I've thought it was odd the way SSMers would ague for the "freedom to marry" by asking the state to regulate their intimate personal relationship. It seems to contradict the desires result.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190194 Apr 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Because not all marriages are so fucked up (you can write the word out).
You can, some of us cannot. Some posters are more equal than others on Topix.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190195 Apr 26, 2013
What kind of loser rates posts over and over again many times?
2 posts removed
Jissthefacts

Covina, CA

#190198 Apr 26, 2013
Must have been a typo or something like that.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#190199 Apr 26, 2013
just the facts wrote:
<quoted text>You Jackass
Nope. That's more your schtick.

And why would I rate my posts bad and yours good you big dummy? Boy are you stupid. Too funny!

P.S. Get an argument and get back to us.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#190200 Apr 26, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to be centering your argument on the basis that they don't, and that is why same-sex marriage is a non-issue. Are you no longer interested in that line of reasoning?
<quoted text>
You hardly ever have a point, you simply post talking points over and over again. Most times they don't even relate to the post you are replying to.
<quoted text>
Marriage is a social construct created by homo-sapiens.
<quoted text>
It doesn't matter if I agree or not. The historical basis for marriage, as the government regulates it in this country, was to protect and ensure stability for the children that could potentially be created from such a union. This is the entire reason the court has accepted that there is a State interest in marriage. If this is no longer the case, than what interest does the State have?
The State interest has always been in regards to "potential." You would know this if you would actually educate yourself rather than running around thinking any of your opinions have any basis if fact.
What is completely illogical, is a group of people not only inviting, but demanding the government regulate them.
You're of the opinion that you "know" quite a bit about this matter.

Tell me, why do you waste your time talking to us "idiots"?

If all of us are morons--ignorant and uneducated on the subjects of Constitutional law, marriage, etc., why do you bother coming here?

Shouldn't you be arguing in a courtroom? Shouldn't you offer your "valuable insight" to the real world?

I've pointed out your obvious flaw several times. You need to feel superior. You have anger issues.

What whips up such fury in someone like you?
2 posts removed

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#190203 Apr 26, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
"Same-Sex Couple Fights for Right to Divorce in Maryland" http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Same-...
"Texas, USA: Dallas Gay Couple Still Seeking Divorce After Four Years"
http://purpleunions.com/blog/2013/01/texas-us...
"Rhode Island Judge Faces Legal Quandary as Gay Couple Seeks Divorce"
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,231473,00...
There are more, but why bother. But one must enjoy the irony. Here we have a group of people screaming that they must be granted the acknowledgement of the government to unite them as one in marriage- because it is a RIGHT and to prevent such would be an infringement on their FREEDOM.
Note the term's- RIGHT and FREEDOM.
Now, since they were granted that "right" and "freedom" they must now fight the GOVERNMENT for their "RIGHT" and "FREEDOM" to dissolve that "MARRIAGE".
The irony being, they are neither "FREE" nor are they exercising a "RIGHT." They are exercising a government granted PRIVILEGE!
Without that silly little piece of paper, they would have been FREE and within their RIGHT to unite or dissolve said union or marriage at WILL!
That my friends is freedom, at least as our founders would have defined it.
Then throw all marriage out the window. Everyone is free to pair up, raise children, and then move on with their lives if they so choose.

We'll let churches own the word "marriage". Only those couples who are afraid of being damned to eternal hell would seek matrimony.

Let's just take government completely out of the business of marriage. No one gets rights or protections. Everyone--gay, straight, whatever--can fend for themselves.

Such a GREAT idea! Why didn't the founders think of that?
San Bernardino

Covina, CA

#190204 Apr 26, 2013
Athens services trash haulers strike again!

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_23118173/a...
San Bernardino

Covina, CA

#190205 Apr 26, 2013
Still cheating the public, Athens?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#190206 Apr 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
You're of the opinion that you "know" quite a bit about this matter.
It's not "opinion", it's proven every time you are unable to provide a rational fact based retort.
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell me, why do you waste your time talking to us "idiots"?
Obama said to spread the wealth, so here I am.
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
If all of us are morons--ignorant and uneducated on the subjects of Constitutional law, marriage, etc., why do you bother coming here?
You have self admitted that you are ignorant of the founding documents. So I figure you have two choices: 1) Remain so and keep looking like one -or- 2) Go educate yourself.

You seem to have chosen the latter.
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Shouldn't you be arguing in a courtroom?
Perhaps I do, do you know?
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Shouldn't you offer your "valuable insight" to the real world?
Are you fake?
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I've pointed out your obvious flaw several times. You need to feel superior. You have anger issues.
Now you are just fabricating things in a sad attempt to save face.

You have been unable to point out a single flaw in my argument, and I am far from angry. For me to get angry with you, you would actually have to have the ability to effect my life. You don't, though your delusions of grandeur are comical.
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
What whips up such fury in someone like you?
Where is the fury? The only anger I see is coming from you, you seem a bit upset about consistently having your ass handed to you.

Take note of your response here, you haven't even attempted to respond to a single question I posed to you, my guess is you lack the ability to. You have only presented two forms of replies to me: 1) A personal attack such as the one you presented here -or- 2) A rant of random talking points that have nothing to do with the subject matter.

Really it is pretty sad for someone who claims to hold a MSW. I would consider requesting a refund of my tuition if I were you.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#190207 Apr 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Then throw all marriage out the window. Everyone is free to pair up, raise children, and then move on with their lives if they so choose.
We'll let churches own the word "marriage". Only those couples who are afraid of being damned to eternal hell would seek matrimony.
Let's just take government completely out of the business of marriage. No one gets rights or protections. Everyone--gay, straight, whatever--can fend for themselves.
Such a GREAT idea! Why didn't the founders think of that?
You are a bit late to the party, I have presented this position to you at least 5 times now. Perhaps if you would slow down and actually absorb the material I post it might not take you so long to catch on?
Rebounds

Covina, CA

#190208 Apr 26, 2013
Shut up you North Korean supporter.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#190209 Apr 26, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>

Such a GREAT idea! Why didn't the founders think of that?
Go find me a State issued Marriage License for George and Martha Washington.
Gays have rights too

Sacramento, CA

#190210 Apr 26, 2013
Gay marriage receiving more support every day.

http://politix.topix.com/homepage/3259-would-...
Big D

Modesto, CA

#190211 Apr 27, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
Then throw all marriage out the window. Everyone is free to pair up, raise children, and then move on with their lives if they so choose.
We'll let churches own the word "marriage". Only those couples who are afraid of being damned to eternal hell would seek matrimony.
Let's just take government completely out of the business of marriage. No one gets rights or protections. Everyone--gay, straight, whatever--can fend for themselves.
Such a GREAT idea! Why didn't the founders think of that?
It is funny you say that, years ago that was my position, remove the word marriage from legal language, the government would not recognize any marriages, only civil unions.

Civil unions are a contract, between anyone that wanted one, couples, gay or straight, or a number of people, regardless of whether it was romantic or even nonromantic relationships.

Give churches the word marriage but make it legally meaningless.

That way Churches could have the word if they wanted it, straight churches could call their couples married, gay supporting churches could call their couples marriages, Poly churches could marry as many as they wanted and all would be equally in the eyes of the law as the underlying legal basis for any of them would be a civil union.

Not even my gay friends liked the idea

I gave it up, there was no support for it
Big D

Modesto, CA

#190212 Apr 27, 2013
Gays have rights too wrote:
Gay marriage receiving more support every day.
http://politix.topix.com/homepage/3259-would-...
That is very very true, and not just here, but all around the world.

Love conquers hate, it just takes a while

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#190213 Apr 27, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
OK... Let's look at "real America". In 2008, just over 40% of live births in this country were to single parent households. That's up from 18.4% in 1980.
I thought that evolutionary mating behavior (from a cross cultural perspective) depended on marriage.
Apparently not...
Don't throw gays under the bus just because you straight people can't seem to stay married.
Hundreds of thousands of us would love to be given the opportunity to marry someone for life.
You can't predict whether or not a gay couple will divorce any more than I can predict whether or not a straight couple will.
Mating behavior is not dependent on marriage. Again, are you serious??? No wonder you are so confused.

Marriage is a constraint (control) on mating behavior. Because the commitment of marriage has been weakened by easy divorce, and the consequences to children ignored, broken marriages and co-habitation have resulted. Calling ss couples married by totally removing children only exasperates the situation.

Social scientists assert that marriage would not exist except for the connection of children. Your premise that sterile gay couples will strengthen marriage is baseless. In fact, that is why the largest, latest and most scientific study to date on seven family types found lesbian couples last, AFTER single mothers. Gay couples did not even register out of THREE THOUSAND participants.

Not looking good VV...

Smirk.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#190214 Apr 27, 2013
Keep it simple, keep marriage as is, one man and one woman. KISS.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#190215 Apr 27, 2013
akpilot wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a bit late to the party, I have presented this position to you at least 5 times now. Perhaps if you would slow down and actually absorb the material I post it might not take you so long to catch on?
I was being flippant in my response to you. It's a ridiculous to believe that the government will stop its involvement in marriage in the foreseeable future.

No one who lives and works in the real world believes that this is an option.

And since it isn't an option, the only right thing to do is to make marriage and divorce available to those law abiding, tax paying, unrelated, consenting adult couples.

Whether it is through political action or judicial interpretation of the Constitution, it will happen. It's only a matter of time.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
US considers banning type of popular rifle ammu... 1 min Far Away 23
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 2 min wow 172,080
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 2 min red and right 313,067
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Joy Division 1,191,660
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 3 min Denisova 149,674
Is Jeb Bush 'evolving' on same-sex marriage and... 4 min WeTheSheeple 190
Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 6 min SpaceBlues 33,975
Giuliani explains why Obama doesn't love America 21 min Fox_Y_Fiends 612
Scott Walker has no college degree. That's norm... 1 hr red and right 1,876
More from around the web